Archaeologica.org

Well I'd to see how that could be explained as a natural formation.
Nice find Uni.

Roy.

Two things that came to mind when i saw that (and confirmed that Google Maps does in fact show the formation); First, that is right in the vicinity that John Gordon claimed for Atlantis in his 1997 book "Egypt: Child of Atlantis", and second, just a little to the east of that grid, is another, fainter grid.

uniface wrote:http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/ar ... blog_last3

That's an amazing pattern/grid. Not least for its size. Wonder how deep that is.

Wonder how deep that is.

I was wondering the same thing. Either there has been a seismic shift or that must have been on dry land, (assuming a man made structure of course), so what would that tell us about its age?
Fascinating.
Time to drag out the maps of old coast lines perhaps.

Roy.

I don't see it at all.

Then either your eyes, your monitor, or your navigation need(s) recalibrating...
You realise you're missing something the size of Connecticut, don't you?
Geez!


Can somebody post the coordinates for Min, please? I'm on my phone right now.

According to Cognito it's a mapping error. Oh booo!

Roy.

Swamp gas ?

Sampling error ?

Don't look at me!

Roy.

All I see is a patch of blue with a few bumps on it.

Then again....the Shroud of Turin looks like a scorched piece of linen to me, as well.


I don't do well on Rorhschact tests.

Perhaps you're using the wrong ink Min!

Roy.

Or the wrong eyes.

When this was first reported a couple of years ago the explanation was ""In this case, however, what users are seeing is an artifact of the data collection process. Bathymetric (or sea floor terrain) data is often collected from boats using sonar to take measurements of the sea floor. The lines reflect the path of the boat as it gathers the data."

George

As one who reads a lot about undersea mapping, I have to go with the towed sonar lines.